Recently, someone asked me if science students have an advantage in stock trading compared to liberal arts students.

For a moment, I really didn't know how to answer.

This question seems to make sense, but it doesn't seem to be the case.

I have been sensitive to numbers since I was young and studied science, but I don't think there is a necessary connection between this and having a talent for stock trading.

I have seen many masters in the stock market who are not strong in logical thinking and are not good at calculations, but this seems to have no effect on their ability to make money from investing.

I have also thought about similar questions, and the conclusion is the same: stocks are not math problems.

Firstly, many people think that there are many things in mathematics that can explain stocks.

For example, probability.

There is a probability of profit and loss, which is the same as gambling.

In theory, as long as the probability is calculated, through the law of large numbers, buying a large number of stocks can achieve profitability.Some quantitative strategies, once programmed into algorithmic trading, can ultimately yield excess returns through the probabilities run by the model.

Advertisement

But if it were really a math problem, there would be a standard solution.

Once a strategy's capital capacity becomes too large, it will eventually become ineffective, and there will be no solution.

Take technical indicators, for example.

All data on technical indicators are derived through data definitions and ultimately calculated.

However, all technical indicators have flaws, and there is no foolproof technical indicator.

On the one hand, this is because technical indicators are lagging, and on the other hand, it is because capital can artificially interfere with technical indicators by creating fake K-lines, fake trading volumes, and so on.

So, while mathematics itself has structured the stock market, it cannot ultimately provide a standard solution for the direction of stocks.

Because everything ultimately lies in the hands of capital, not in mathematical formulas.

Here, the formulas can be written in any way, entirely at the discretion of the capital.Even with absolute control over funds, one must be cautious when writing the so-called formulas.

Because in the stock market, what's more important than control is human nature, that is, the opponent.

Stocks are a problem of chips, not a math problem, nor a single-sided capital issue.

Because, it is possible that money can't buy stocks, and it is also possible that stocks can't be sold for money.

All transactions require an opponent.

Stocks are not a complete zero-sum game, but their essence is a zero-sum game.

In simple terms, even if the stock price goes up and does not fall again, it is because the subsequent funds have redefined the stock price after the zero-sum game.

The essence of buying and selling is to exchange money for goods, which is equal.

This means that the essence of stock trading is to constantly find opponents.

Those who hold stocks for a long time are just thinking that in the future, there will be opponents who will continue to buy their stocks at higher prices, that's all.So, your competitor may not be in the present, but in the future.

This is the essence of stocks, the game of capital.

And the essence of the game is human nature.

The questions that capital thinks about every day are not mathematical problems at all.

It's neither technical indicators, nor valuation calculations, nor space measurement, but the reasons for others to take over the plate, and how to realize buying low and selling high.

The so-called logic we have, capital thinks about it every day.

They think about how to make the story realistic, and then be able to attract others to take over the plate.

Even long-term investment, value investment, is also looking for reasons, looking for reasons to tell stories.

Because many things you don't say, no one knows at all.

No matter how good the performance is, there are only four announcements a year, so how to make money in the remaining more than 240 trading days?Short-term games, long-term games, in the end, they are all games.

Technical charts, technical indicators, performance, order status, all kinds of good and bad news, ultimately they all become tools for the game.

You say, can these things be calculated through mathematics, through numbers?

We all know that the golden ratio is the most widely used and effective in all things in the universe.

Why is the application of the golden ratio in the stock market also very effective?

Some questions, you really want to think clearly, in fact, it is not so difficult.

We all know that the famous painting Mona Lisa was painted with the golden ratio, and people will naturally feel that this painting has a sense of beauty.

In the stock market, the shape of the K-line is the same.

The K-line under the golden ratio has a unique aesthetic charm.The K-line that conforms to the golden ratio is also the most likely to attract funds to collude or, in other words, to take over the market together.

This confirms the saying that the main force always lets you see what he wants you to see.

The reason why the technique is effective is because the funds set up a trap, letting you see the signals he sent out, and helping him to support the market together.

When collecting chips at the bottom, the main force will make the chart as ugly as possible, the more unexpected the better.

Because his purpose is to get the chips, not to let you pick up the cheap chips, so the more covert it is, the better.

Why is there rarely any battle method that teaches you to bottom fish?

Why is there rarely a mathematical formula for bottom fishing?

The saying that there is no bottom in a fall is actually false, there must be a bottom, but there is no complete rule in the fall, so there is no calculation formula, everything depends on the main force's construction and layout.

In the stock market, many so-called theories are just unverifiable and unfalsifiable.

Therefore, all kinds of so-called battle methods, in the end, are mostly deceptive, and there are very few that can make money in actual combat.The truly excellent methods are those that can be implemented into strategies, yet all strategies, once they enter into algorithmic trading, will fall into the cycle of becoming ineffective once again.

So, what is the ultimate destination of stock trading?

The destination is actually quite simple: it is to use fundamental timing to defeat the majority of the game.

The larger the scale of timing, the greater the chances of winning.

This may sound awkward, but it is actually easy to understand.

The key to making money in stocks is to find a relatively low point in the market and a relatively low point in individual stocks, and then start waiting after buying.

If "luck" is good, the stock price may start to rise after the purchase.

If "luck" is not good, the stock price will still rise after a period of time.

The essence of this trading method to make money is to give up the game and avoid the main force's sickle.

The main force will never play the game with patient capital because the time cycle is too long.More often than not, the main force welcomes patient capital to lock positions, which is equivalent to helping them buy a part of the chips, reducing the pressure of lifting the price.

When your trading method breaks free from the control of the main force, you are not far from success.

Of course, there is also a small group of people who have another way.

They possess certain talents that allow them to understand the trading methods of the main force and complete counter-human nature transactions.

Then through short-term trading, they can achieve quick profits, and even become wealthy.

But after all, the proportion of this part of retail investors is a minority, and most retail investors can only follow the first method to make money in the market.